I doubt it. Even five or ten years after the ACW, plantation owners were seeing the "advantages" of convict labor, wage slavery, and share cropping over chattel slavery.
For one thing, the planter had no requirement to provide for the housing, health and feeding of the workers. For another, all of those methods, unlike slavery, were equal opportunity (my grandmother was a share cropper, two of her brothers worked in lumber "company towns", etc) which brought enough workers into competition for labor to be cheap as dirt. They got to play off the races against each other ("You don't want a raise; why, that'd make me fire you and hire Negroes in your place...")
No, the new system was a quite satisfactory deal for the planters.
The only thing missing, from the perspective of the wealthy planters, was a system of social control so that freed slaves (and uppity poor whites, too) were kept "in their proper place". Corrupt police, the klan, white vigilante groups incited by racist agitation, etc provided that control.
It was a filthy system, but it certainly proved that the wealthy planters knew how to adapt...
What needed to happen was for the big plantations to be divided up and given to the freed slaves. That would be the death blow (if not instantly, then soon) against the planter aristocrats. It probably ought to result in collaborative enterprise among many of the freed slaves. It would remove a malign, monied influence in Southern politics.
And frankly, the slaves had
bought that land with generations of unpaid labor and misery.